Partly allowed

Gulzar and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Allahabad HC24 May 2019CRLP/14192/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Court partially granted dismissal petition seeking quashing of FIR EC under dowry and IPC sections. It orders investigation against Petitioners No. 1, 2 3, 4 and 6 continues but arrests are stayed until police report; Petitioner No. 5 Petitioner dismissed due to sexual assault accusation.

What did the court decide?

Investigation against Petitioners 1-4 and 6 to continue; arrest stayed till police report under Section 173 CrPC; Petition dismissed against Petitioner 5.

Gulzar and 5 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Dowry and Cruelty | Allahabad HC (2019)

¶1

Court No. - 33

¶2

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. WRIT PETITION No. - 14192 of 2019 Petitioner :- Gulzar And 5 Others Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Syed Imran Ibrahim,Anurag Vajpeyi Counsel for Respondent :- G.A.

¶3

Hon'ble Manoj Misra,J. Hon'ble Suresh Kumar Gupta,J.

¶4

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners; learned A.G.A. for the respondents 1 and 2; and perused the record.

¶5

The instant petition seeks quashing of the first information report dated 19.09.2018 registered as Case Crime No.102 of 2018, under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 506, 354, 376, 511 IPC and Section 3/4 of D.P. Act, P.S. Mahila Thana, District Gautam Budh Nagar.

¶6

The allegations in the impugned first information report are that the informant (victim) was married to Gulzar (petitioner no.1) on 22.02.2010 and in connection with demand of dowry, she had been harassed. Apart from above, specific allegations have been levelled against Raheesh (non-petitioner) and Salman (petitioner no.5) in respect of sexually assaulting the victim.

¶7

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners is that the allegations are false and there is an effort to falsely implicate the entire family of the husband.

¶8

Be that as it may, as specific allegation of sexual assault has been levelled against the petitioner no.5 (Salman) and Raheesh (non-petitioner), neither the prayer of the petitioners to quash the first information report can be accepted nor any relief can be granted to the petitioner no.5 in writ jurisdiction.

¶9

However, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we deem it appropriate to dispose off this petition by providing that in so far as petitioner no.1 (Gulzar); petitioner no.2 (Aneesh); petitioner no.3 (Istgar); petitioner no.4 (Mehtab); and petitioner no.6 (Nasru) are concerned, investigation of the case as against them shall continue and brought to its logical conclusion but, subject to their cooperation in the investigation, they shall not be arrested in the aforesaid case till submission of police report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. In so far as petitioner no.5 (Salman) is concerned, the petition stands dismissed.

¶10

The petition stands disposed off .

¶11

Order Date :- 24.5.2019 AKShukla/-

Gulzar and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gulzar and 5 Others v. State of U.P. and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sachin Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Dhananjay Mittal Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Imran and 10 Others Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Smt. Meena Vs State of U.P. and 6 Others

Virendra Nishad @ Virendra Sahani Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Rizwan and Another Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others